Questions posed in focus groups

The groups had limited structure, with only nine questions planned for the two hour period. This was to ensure discussions were free flowing, with plenty of time for young people to take the discussion into areas that concerned them, in keeping with the phenomenological approach (Morgan, 1997). Questions were designed to be as simple as possible, but it was recognised that young people may need to seek more guidance than adults (Scott, 2008). In this case further explanation would be given to address the clarification sought as it was recognised that 'it is preferable for interviewers to paraphrase the question, than give the standard response' (Scott, 2008, p.92). Questions were drafted as below, building on the research questions, with careful consideration given to their design as ‘Quality answers are directly related to quality questions’ (Krueger, 1998a, p.59). Morgan

82

(1997) highlighted the importance in interpreting focus group findings of determining what the participants saw as important and distinguishing this from what they found interesting. Morgan (1997) highlighted that the length of discussion did not necessarily indicate relative importance. The suggested approach was to ask the participants in a final question, what they thought the most important areas of discussion had been. These questions were posed after a brief outline of the purpose of the research and ground rules concerning confidentiality:

1. What do you think of the the Government proposal for all young people to be in education, training or jobs with training to age 18 by 2015?

2. Why do you think some young people are not in jobs or college?

3. What are the challenges you and others in your situation face when you try to find a job, particularly with training, in this area?

4. What are the challenges in getting a place at college or other education or training provider in this area?

5. If you could change one thing to make it easier to get a place at college or another education or training provider, or a job with training, what would you change?

6. Thinking about your life before you were 16, how did it prepare you for education, training or a job with training at 16?

7. If you could change one thing about your experience before the age of 16, which would have made it more likely that you’d be in education, training or a job with training now, what would you change?

8. What do you think is the most important issue we have talked about today? (each young person to be encouraged to highlight one issue) 9. Is there anything else anyone wants to raise which you haven’t had the

83

4.6

Data recording

Focus group discussions were fully recorded, both by camera and voice recorder, in order to capture the detail of who said what and to be able to view expressions and gestures after the focus group has finished. Such in-depth recording has been shown to be valuable in capturing focus group discussions in particular (Krueger and Casey, 2000). A complete transcript of all discussion was recorded, including noting other aspects of the discussion, such as pauses and any interruptions. Hammersley (2010, p.556) identifies a series of nine areas to be considered when transcribing, from ‘whether to transcribe any particular audio- or video-recording, and if so how much of it’ to whether ‘to include relevant gestures and fine or gross physical movement’. For this research, all discussions in focus groups were fully transcribed so all data from the participants was taken into the data analysis stage. However, gestures were not recorded on the transcripts, but the videos were retained for subsequent reference during the analysis. This approach was taken as whilst it was considered important to ensure every conversation in every focus group was fully transcribed, it was not realistic to include every gesture in the written transcript. Additionally, to maintain confidentiality, where place names or particular colleges were referred to, the generic titles of ‘place name’ and ‘college name’ were used respectively. An extract from the transcript of one of the focus groups is included as Appendix Three. All quotations are also anonymous, as anonymity was guaranteed to all participants as part of the agreement for taking part in the research. Consideration was given to the use of pseudonyms or short descriptions, but this was rejected on the basis that it could be seen as emphasising the power of the researcher over the participants and could lead to some comments being given greater weight, as explained in the section on ethical considerations. Hammersley (2010, p.8) explores the issue of naming and identifies the issue that ‘any labels we give to speakers, beyond numbers or letters, may convey information about them, and this raises questions about what should and should not be included’. Hammersley (2010) expresses concern that names, or even pseudonyms, could be given to convey gender, but this may then imply gender is the most significant factor when considering that person's contribution in the interaction. Guenther (2009, p.412) outlines the power of

84

naming, which he develops as the ‘politics of naming’ as he explores the complexities of whether to name places and participants in research. He highlights that ‘because names are powerful, choosing to use - or to alter - them is also an act of power’ (p.413). This was considered in relation to the potential benefits of a greater understanding of the particular circumstances of the participant who made the comment (for example in relation to gender, disability or being a young offender). I decided, however, to let each quotation stand on its own to be considered equally with all others, rather than the researcher take the position of determining what characteristics of that young person's background, character or circumstances should be singled out (Guenther, 2009). This approach reflects other research in the same field, such as Spielhofer's (2009) report for the government on young people's participation. All quotations are also presented verbatim from the transcription, even where this may require greater effort on the part of the reader to understand the comment, as this presents the young people's perspectives in their words, as they chose to express their views at the time. Finally, all participants were thanked for their involvement and an outline of the findings was sent to each participant and the responses, although limited, are considered in Section 4.8 below.